1. On January 31, 2018, the Defendant imposed indemnity of KRW 1,788,840 against Plaintiff A and imposed on Plaintiff B.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 3, 1996, the registration of preservation of ownership was made on the ownership of Gyeonggi-do (competent authority: superintendent of education) on the land of 354 square meters in Pyeongtaek-si D-si (hereinafter “instant land”).

The defendant is delegated to the administrative authority with the right to manage the land of this case.

B. As a result of the cadastral survey conducted on November 24, 2017, the Defendant issued a disposition to impose each indemnity of KRW 1,788,840, and KRW 2,032,70 on the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the Plaintiff, on the ground that the instant building owned by the Plaintiff was 22 square meters out of the instant land, and that the Plaintiff’s building owned by the Plaintiff was 25 square meters and occupied each without permission, on the ground that the instant building was 25 square meters out of the instant land, and the Plaintiff’s building owned by the Plaintiff was invaded, and the period of imposition on January 31, 2018 from December 19, 2012 to December 18, 2017.

C. The Plaintiffs dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal on March 23, 2018, but the Gyeonggi-do Office of Education Administrative Appeals dismissed the Plaintiffs’ respective claims for administrative appeal on July 16, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, 6, 9, Eul evidence No. 1 (including the number with each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The gist of the plaintiffs' assertion is that the plaintiffs have occupied each part of the land of this case in a public performance for at least 20 years in a peaceful manner, and that the acquisition by prescription has already been completed for each part of the land of this case, and thus, the defendant cannot impose indemnity against the plaintiffs on the ground of the land possession.

B. Determination 1) On March 21, 2018, the Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against Gyeonggi-do, the owner of the instant land, seeking the implementation of the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer based on the completion of prescriptive acquisition with respect to each part of the Plaintiffs’ possession of the instant land (Seoul District Court Decision 2018Kadan52790, and the first instance court of the said lawsuit on October 18, 2019, the Plaintiff purchased KRW 132 square meters adjacent to the instant land and acquired the ownership transfer registration on April 30, 1971.